Wofford as an affirmation of the TO

[Yaller Jacket]

Coming off the bus, our guys looked much bigger and more athletic. Our D knows the TO. But with a fast quarterback who can run the option, well coached players who know their assignments, and a good offensive play caller, they gave us fits. As was said when we first hired PJ, we have a better chance of competing with the factories because of the same factors with the TO.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

What was disappointing is that their D was much more disciplined than ours. Both D's know how to defend this offense.

 

[forensicbuzz]

This is something I was going to come back to once I had time to digest. I've intentionally stayed away from reading game comments from other and from the coaching staff because I wanted to present my observations and opinions untainted by others' opinions.

At first, I started to get frustrated by our inability to hold the line on defense. Then I started thinking about everything that went into yesterday. Here are my thoughts, ready or not:

Overall/General Comments:

1. Wofford runs essentially the same offense we do. I saw the Diamond we ran last year and a modified wishbone/shotgun. The QB had a good grasp of their offense and ran it well. There's a reason they (like us) run this type of offense; it can be successful without the big haas's. They did to us what we usually do the Clemson and UGA: be competitive with inferior talent. I think a big part of yesterday should be about giving credit to Wofford for able to run their offense effectively.
2. Wofford (like us) practices against the 3-O every day. They moved well and were disciplined, thus making it harder for us to execute our offense. There was a talent differential, and it showed yesterday. They hung around, making it uncomfortable, but I never thought the outcome was in question.
3. I think our guys thought they would come out and cakewalk through Wofford. I don't think the coaches felt that, but the players probably weren't taking them seriously enough, but now will Tulane and Southern.
4. We were missing several starters on both offense and defense that would have probably make an impact that were out on suspensions. Initial thoughts go to Waller and Griffin.

Offense: This is a story of two halves.

Good

1. The option (specifically the T-O) looked sharp most of the time.
2. Wofford loaded the box with 8-9 defenders to force the ball to the edge.
3. The edge blocking looked good most of the day. The receivers sealed the edge well.
4. The offensive line appeared to pass block well. This was Wofford, so we'll see when we play some bigger, faster boys.
5. The passing game opened up. JT showed some strong throws, on-time and on-target. That's encouraging. Our receivers didn't have any "drops".
6. There were no fumbles (lost or otherwise) from under center. There were no false-start penalties (that I remember). Both good signs of concentration and paying attention.
7. I think every play was positive yardage.
8. Four possessions in the 2nd half, four touchdowns.
9. I was impressed with the AB play and okay with the BB play.
10. I was really surprised that Snoddy got as many touches (and designed touches) as he did. I didn't think he performed well in the Spring or Fall camp, but he was able to gain the edge and turn it up. Let's see what he does against bigger boys.

Bad

1. This was Wofford. we punted twice and kicked twice (missing one of them). Nine possessions should have resulted in 63 points not 38. To get that 38 points, we had to go on 4th down at least 3 times, one of them being 4 and 6.
2. The offensive line didn't get a great push. This is a D1-AA team; our O-Line should be demolishing their tackles and LB's.

Defensive thoughts will come later. Going to watch a movie with my wife.​

 

[Boomergump]

This is something I was going to come back to once I had time to digest. I've intentionally stayed away from reading game comments from other and from the coaching staff because I wanted to present my observations and opinions untainted by others' opinions.

At first, I started to get frustrated by our inability to hold the line on defense. Then I started thinking about everything that went into yesterday. Here are my thoughts, ready or not:

Overall/General Comments:

1. Wofford runs essentially the same offense we do. I saw the Diamond we ran last year and a modified wishbone/shotgun. The QB had a good grasp of their offense and ran it well. There's a reason they (like us) run this type of offense; it can be successful without the big haas's. They did to us what we usually do the Clemson and UGA: be competitive with inferior talent. I think a big part of yesterday should be about giving credit to Wofford for able to run their offense effectively.
2. Wofford (like us) practices against the 3-O every day. They moved well and were disciplined, thus making it harder for us to execute our offense. There was a talent differential, and it showed yesterday. They hung around, making it uncomfortable, but I never thought the outcome was in question.
3. I think our guys thought they would come out and cakewalk through Wofford. I don't think the coaches felt that, but the players probably weren't taking them seriously enough, but now will Tulane and Southern.
4. We were missing several starters on both offense and defense that would have probably make an impact that were out on suspensions. Initial thoughts go to Waller and Griffin.

Offense: This is a story of two halves.

Good

1. The option (specifically the T-O) looked sharp most of the time.
2. Wofford loaded the box with 8-9 defenders to force the ball to the edge.
3. The edge blocking looked good most of the day. The receivers sealed the edge well.
4. The offensive line appeared to pass block well. This was Wofford, so we'll see when we play some bigger, faster boys.
5. The passing game opened up. JT showed some strong throws, on-time and on-target. That's encouraging. Our receivers didn't have any "drops".
6. There were no fumbles (lost or otherwise) from under center. There were no false-start penalties (that I remember). Both good signs of concentration and paying attention.
7. I think every play was positive yardage.
8. Four possessions in the 2nd half, four touchdowns.
9. I was impressed with the AB play and okay with the BB play.
10. I was really surprised that Snoddy got as many touches (and designed touches) as he did. I didn't think he performed well in the Spring or Fall camp, but he was able to gain the edge and turn it up. Let's see what he does against bigger boys.

Bad

1. This was Wofford. we punted twice and kicked twice (missing one of them). Nine possessions should have resulted in 63 points not 38. To get that 38 points, we had to go on 4th down at least 3 times, one of them being 4 and 6.
2. The offensive line didn't get a great push. This is a D1-AA team; our O-Line should be demolishing their tackles and LB's.

Defensive thoughts will come later. Going to watch a movie with my wife.​

One thing I disagree with is our OL getting a push. I think they knocked them back pretty good. Most of the time the BB got stoned, it was an unblocked player (by scheme -bad read) doing the stoning. A couple times it was just running into the backs of OLs and not running to day light. Otherwise I pretty much concur.

 

[forensicbuzz]

One thing I disagree with is our OL getting a push. I think they knocked them back pretty good. Most of the time the BB got stoned, it was an unblocked player (by scheme -bad read) doing the stoning. A couple times it was just running into the backs of OLs and not running to day light. Otherwise I pretty much concur.

I hear what you're saying. My comments are from my initial impressions of Saturday only. I haven't gone back and watched the game a second time (not sure I will). You may be 100% correct. However, I expected to see our OLine dominate their DLine, and I didn't get the impression that happened. If we get the same result going against the bigger teams, then I'll be satisfied. But until then, I'm mildly concerned, but not to any point of distraction.

All this being said, the biggest improvements occur between the 1st and 2nd game. So, let's see how these guys handle Tulane, on the Road.

 

[Boomergump]

I hear what you're saying. My comments are from my initial impressions of Saturday only. I haven't gone back and watched the game a second time (not sure I will). You may be 100% correct. However, I expected to see our OLine dominate their DLine, and I didn't get the impression that happened. If we get the same result going against the bigger teams, then I'll be satisfied. But until then, I'm mildly concerned, but not to any point of distraction.

All this being said, the biggest improvements occur between the 1st and 2nd game. So, let's see how these guys handle Tulane, on the Road.

I thought their D Line had some tough kids. Even so, when we ran plays that every guy got blocked, the LOS ended up behind our OLs rear ends. That is what you are looking for, along with the formation of well defined holes. You have to keep in mind there were 9 in the box all day. Even with a good line surge, there are a lot of bodies in there. Also, in pass pro, our guys really didn't let anybody through. When you are retreating and catching people it is hard to look dominant, but by that measure (no pressures or sacks), you have to be pleased. If that keeps up against the upper half of the schedule, it is going to be a long year for our opponents.